Topic: Today different types of robots are developed which are good friends to us and help us both at home and work. Is this a positive or negative development?
The prevalence of robots at home and in the workplace has drawn much debate recently. While some maintain that robots can serve as companions for those in need, I believe the development is negative on the whole considering the concomitant rising unemployment rate.
On the one hand, artificial companions can promote emotional and physical well-being for the elderly in particular. Clear evidence of this can be seen in the example of the Japanese caretaker robot “Hirokan”. This robot is equipped with the latest advances in artificial intelligence and is capable of conducting a thoughtful conversation with an elderly individual based on its in-depth analysis of his personality, interests, and past events. These heart-warming conversations have proven effective in reducing loneliness, stress levels, and the potential risk of depression among senior Japanese citizens. In addition, the robot also functions as a caregiver that can physically assist seniors in performing personal hygiene activities and provides additional stability for them when walking.
On the other hand, the delegation of various mechanical tasks to robots is likely to give rise to greater unemployment figures. Currently, a large number of manual workers are being replaced by cutting-edge robotics systems in numerous factories around the world. For instance, thousands of Chinese assembly workers at Foxconn, a major manufacturer of Apple products, have recently been made redundant after the company adopted a fully automated process that minimizes the need for a skilled and unskilled human labor supply. This, in turn, has resulted in a rise in reported crimes including robbery, burglary, and gambling as the jobless workers struggle to earn a living. As more companies worldwide have adopted similar approaches, automation has become an inevitably that has to be addressed with proactive corporate and governmental reform.
In conclusion, despite the positives of man-made companions for older segments of the population, I am firmly of the opinion that the increasing popularity of robots poses a serious threat to our workforce and society at large. Therefore, governments should enact laws to curb the rate of automatisation, allowing workers to prepare for increased competition with robots.
- The only way to improve safety on our roads is to give much stricter punishments for driving offences To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- The diagram below shows the plan of a medical centre in 2008 and 2010 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and making comparisons where relevant 78
- The increase in the production of consumer goods results in damage to the natural environment What are the causes of this What can be done to solve this problem 89
- Many people are working longer hours Why is this happening What problems can this cause to people 89
- The graph below compares changes in the birth rates of China and the USA between 1920 and 2000 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 140, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...reater unemployment figures. Currently, a large number of manual workers are being replaced by cu...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, so, therefore, well, while, as to, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, in particular, on the whole, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 41.998997996 131% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1953.0 1615.20841683 121% => OK
No of words: 346.0 315.596192385 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.64450867052 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.11288313809 2.80592935109 111% => OK
Unique words: 221.0 176.041082164 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.638728323699 0.561755894193 114% => OK
syllable_count: 630.0 506.74238477 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.2183497644 49.4020404114 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.5 106.682146367 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7142857143 20.7667163134 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5 7.06120827912 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.10846578896 0.244688304435 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0374312648243 0.084324248473 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0369490596917 0.0667982634062 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0735916591433 0.151304729494 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0471763406937 0.056905535591 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 13.0946893788 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 50.2224549098 60% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.73 12.4159519038 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.35 8.58950901804 132% => OK
difficult_words: 143.0 78.4519038076 182% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.